MANGAL SEN Vs. MUSAMMAT NAOLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case one Narain Das an occupancy-tenant, executed a simple mortgage-deed on the 25th August 1904 of a grove of mango trees standing upon his holding. Mangal Sen on the 19th July 1909 brought an action on the above- mentioned mortgage-bond for the recovery of his money. Two pleas were urged in defence.

(2.) The first was that as the bond was not registered it was not admissible in evidence and created no charge in favour of the mortgagee, the second was that the suit was barred by limitation. The learned Munsif came to the conclusion that the trees which were hypothecated were not immovable property within the meaning of Section 59 of the Transfer of Property Act or Section 17 of the Registration Act and that, therefore, the bond required ho registration. On the question of limitation the learned Munsif relying, on Ram Ghulam v. Manohar Das A.W.N. (1887) 59 came to the conclusion that the suit was not barred by limitation. The learned Munsif gave the plaintiff a decree.

(3.) There was an appeal by the defendant to the lower Appellate Court and the pleas of registration and limitation were repeated. Those pleas found favour with the lower Appellate Court which reversed the decree of the Court of first instance and dismissed the claim.